49 ms·

Your Phone Is Your Castle

499 points by 0DHm2CxO7Lb3 6y ago

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
neom 6y ago
I noticed it's powered by an "ethical operating system", however they don't really go into any detail about what an ethical operating system is.
- valvar 6y ago
  An operating system containing only libre software, I assume. At least in my book, software must respect the freedoms of its users in order to be ethical. And their OS is indeed libre and respects its users.
  - threeseed 6y ago
    Sounds pretty hypocritical if you're not running it on libre hardware as well. I assume Purism makes their own CPUs, memory etc ?
    - kelnos 6y ago
      No, but they are running on hardware they've carefully selected that does not require any non-free software or binary blobs to operate, and they include hardware kill switches for all the sensors and radios so if you still don't completely trust this "third party" hardware, you can at least shut it off and only turn it on when you really need to use it. At some point you do, unfortunately, have to compromise, because expecting a small, privacy-focused upstart to do their own silicon design and run their own fabs is just not reasonable.
      - FeepingCreature 6y ago
        Also the modem doesn't have DMA access to the phone's memory.
    - bo1024 6y ago
      libre hardware isn't really a term, unless you are referring to firmware maybe. What do you mean by it? (added) For example, Stallman: > In the meantime, there is no need to reject hardware with nonfree designs on principle. Last line of this essay: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.en.html
- teddyh 6y ago
  They use their own PureOS: https://pureos.net/ https://pureos.net/
- fsflover 6y ago
  PureOS is a free OS endorsed by the Free Software Foundation: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html.
james412 6y ago
They've taken so long to deliver Librem 5 that even normies have started reverting back to candybar phones in the meantime
- aftergibson 6y ago
  Shows the strength of the pinephone. Release something cheap, quick and hackable rather than try to deliver everything. It’s been a really impressive project so far!
  - d33 6y ago
    Thanks for reminding me about it. I can see it's already sold out: https://store.pine64.org/ https://store.pine64.org/ Curious if there's going to be another batch.
    - blihp 6y ago
      They're doing CE batches which run about a month each but the underlying hardware is the same for all of them. Just follow their blog (https://www.pine64.org/blog/ https://www.pine64.org/blog/) and wait for the announcement for the next batch preorder.
      - qchris 6y ago
        Not quite the same; they're now selling two slightly different versions. One has 2GB of RAM, while the other has 3GB RAM and is usually marketed under a "Convergence" label. For example, the UBports CE and the pmOS hardware has some slight revision that changes your ability to connect with the phone over Ethernet. I believe that the upcoming Manjaro CE will have the same distinction between models. [1] https://store.pine64.org/product/pinephone-community-edition-postmarketos-with-convergence-package-limited-edition-linux-smartphone/ https://store.pine64.org/product/pinephone-community-edition...
        blihp 6y ago
        Right, but that's a different model. The 2GB CE's are otherwise identical to each other aside from bug fixes.
phoe-krk 6y ago
Missing "your" in the beginning of the title.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  I suspect that Hacker News editorialized that title automatically.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - OJFord 6y ago
    In case anyone reading's unaware, when that happens (if it seems silly/obviously not an improvement) you can edit and resubmit exactly the same title as originally submitted, and it will then be accepted as-is.
- dang 6y ago
  Fixed. Thanks!
saagarjha 6y ago
> Because iOS software, backed by iPhone hardware, actively prevents a customer from installing any software on an iPhone outside of the App Store, it does also prevent attackers from installing malicious software. Because the App Store has rules about how applications (outside of their own) can access customer data, if Apple discovers a competitor like Google or Facebook is violating its privacy rules it can remotely remove their software from iPhones, even internal corporate versions of software owned by Google or Facebook employees. This is a bit inaccurate; first because the App Store has a spotty record of stopping malware from reaching your phone and also because the apps pulled there did not go through the App Store, they were actually sideloaded using enterprise deployment. Apple does have the ability to remotely disable applications downloaded from the App Store, but to my knowledge it has never used this ability. > These companies have built very sophisticated and secure defenses all in the name of protecting you from the world outside their walls, yet in reality the walls are designed to keep you inside much more than they are designed to keep attackers out. The security community often gets so excited about the sophistication of these defenses backed by secure enclaves and strong cryptography that their singular focus on what those defenses mean for attackers blinds them from thinking about what they mean for everyone else. I mean, all you have to do is look at the things that are implemented to see that Apple's goal in many cases is to protect their software, not you. There is custom silicon in every recent iPhone that does nothing but stop modification of kernel code, even in the face of code execution and arbitrary read/write in EL1: interesting from an academic standpoint, but if you stop and think about it for more than a second it's entirely useless for actually protecting users.
- syshum 6y ago
  Apple's goal is to protect their share price.. Nothing else. Everything Apple does is in service of that goal. This is why they are hardline on AppStore policies, and why they are hardline against Independent repair. Any PR they have about protecting the user is just marketing
  - logical_proof 6y ago
    I’ve been seeing this idea on the Internet a lot more for months now and I’ve been trying to put my finger on what I think is wrong with it I think I finally figured it out. I work for a corporation, it’s not a massive corporation, when I first started it was a midsize family owned company and we never did work in service to the bottom line at least not solely. First and foremost we were interested in customers and providing value to them. I think that any major corporation or business small large whatever also has that same responsibility and probably also the same drive. Any organization is made up of multiple people and there’s definitely going to be some actors that are completely bottom line driven but you’re going to also have individuals whose purpose is meeting customer needs and providing customer value. I’m not saying Apple is an altruistic corporation or doesn’t have concern for the bottom line, but making such a broad generalization to say that Apple only serves their bottom line perhaps sets you and others up with a pessimistic attitude where the people doing good work are missed. This is mostly a bit of introspection on the thought that I’ve been trying to flesh out for the last few months and it’s not meant as a criticism of your comment in anyway I understand the sentiment of where you’re coming from because I’ve also been in that same place. I think my views are just changing a little bit and I thought I’d take this opportunity to write them down hope you have a great day.
underdeserver 6y ago
Obligatory CGP Grey video: https://youtu.be/e-ZpsxnmmbE https://youtu.be/e-ZpsxnmmbE
hevelvarik 6y ago
It will be great to have more players in the smart phone OS domain so I hope this makes it big. On the other hand, the downside of taking the security and privacy of your phone into your own hands, is that ... you’ve taken the security and privacy of the phone into your own hands. I’m happy to pay Apple to do it for me because my phone is nowhere near my main or most important computing device and I also quite like that they poke google and Facebook in the eye from time to time. Sure, Apple is just a profit driven enterprise like the rest but their business model is directly related to keeping users happy at least for some value of users and happy. The only downside for me is that I can’t write an app for my device because I haven’t bought into the Apple computer ecosystem.
- 29083011397778 6y ago
  > I’m happy to pay Apple to do it for me because my phone is nowhere near my main or most important computing device But for millions, their mobile device is their main or most important device, whether it runs iOS, iPadOS, or Android. It can be their main device, with one example being Apple's divisive "What's a computer" ad. Another example is those that rely on mobile, due either to cost or lack of physical space for a desktop or laptop. For others, their mobile is the most important, likely because that's where all their messages, contacts, location history, and more, resides.
  - nodamage 6y ago
    > For others, their mobile is the most important, likely because that's where all their messages, contacts, location history, and more, resides. Indeed. And some of those people value the security and privacy of that data and want to reduce the risk of having it stolen by malware and rogue apps, so they intentionally buy into an ecosystem that enforces strict controls on what apps can run on their devices.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- Polylactic_acid 6y ago
ohgreatwtf 6y ago
>your phone is your castle, you decide what is on it >systemd
- einpoklum 6y ago
  Where I read this, I laughed; then it occurred to me that maybe systemd actually gets installed on some phones; then I cried a little.
  - megous 6y ago
    There's quite a bit of variety in OSes I checked. Anything from systemd, to upstart, to random bash init scripts (some oses are based on devuan).
nodamage 6y ago
> Your security and privacy aren’t really protected inside these walls because the main point of these security measures is to enforce control, security against attackers and protecting your privacy is mostly marketing spin. The author presents this as fact but does nothing to actually justify the claim. I'm not sure why we should assume it is true when two decades of history of malware on Windows (and to a lesser extent, Android) clearly demonstrate the problems with having no walls at all. The irony of course being that this article itself is a marketing piece for this company's product.
- rbecker 6y ago
  > The author presents this as fact but does nothing to actually justify the claim. Let me fill in the justification then: https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/03/01/google-explicitly-bans-ad-blockers-from-the-play-store-except-all-those-ad-blocking-web-browsers-apparently/ https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/03/01/google-explicitly-b... https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/03/apple-bans-app-used-by-hong-kong-protestors/ https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/03/apple-bans-app-used-by-... https://time.com/5497200/samsung-facebook-app-delete/ https://time.com/5497200/samsung-facebook-app-delete/ Edit as reply: They justify the claim that phone vendors enforce control unrelated to security. And the various linuxes and FOSS Android ROMs can serve as examples of reasonably secure systems without walled gardens. (Or more accurately, walled gardens, but where the user has the key to the garden gates, and can install alternative repositories/app stores). With all that, it takes a downright reckless degree of trust in corporations that have already betrayed that trust many times, to believe their motives in locking down ever more computing platforms are to benefit the user, and that this continual retreat of user freedoms won't end badly.
  - nodamage 6y ago
    I'm not exactly sure how you think these examples justify the author's claim, can you elaborate? Cause it seems like what you're doing is the equivalent of pointing to an example of someone killing another person and then saying "gotcha! see how the existence of police and murder laws don't completely prevent murder?" The underlying question is does the walled garden approach improve the security and privacy of the overall ecosystem compared to the non-walled alternative, not whether it leads to 100% perfect security and privacy (which is an unobtainable ideal).
keenmaster 6y ago
I just want a phone with full Windows 10 that is as customizable as desktop computers are. Phones are very powerful nowadays. There's no reason for them to have the same limitations as 10 or even 5 years ago.
- dannyw 6y ago
  There is a good reason: battery life.
  - keenmaster 6y ago
    It's my device. I should have the choice to override the standard use case to unlock the phone's full functionality at the expense of battery life. I almost always have a charging cable with me, and a 20,000 mAh powerbank. Furthermore, there is a lot of room to increase charging speeds, but most phone manufacturers have dragged their feet because extremely fast charging speeds aren't necessary for the standard use case. However, that "standard use case" is outdated and needs to be reevaluated.
    - gambiting 6y ago
      >> Furthermore, there is a lot of room to increase charging speeds, but most phone manufacturers have dragged their feet because extremely fast charging speeds aren't necessary for the standard use case. And you know, the very small matter of rapid charging destroying phone batteries quickly. There are phones out there which will charge at 30 or every 40(!!!) watts of power, but it tends to kill the battery rather quickly. Vast majority of people charge their phones at night, and then the phone gets a good 6-10 hours of uninterrupted charging. If anything, phones charge too quickly by default, at the expense of battery life. >>It's my device. I should have the choice to override the standard use case to unlock the phone's full functionality at the expense of battery life. You're free to do with your device as you please, but I don't see why anyone else should be obliged to cater to your wants and needs.
      - keenmaster 6y ago
marcinzm 6y ago
Is it just me or does this feel to be written in a FUD marketing style? Very strong focus on fear in the writing and what seems like cherry picked examples. Then again I have learned to have a defensive and negative reaction to anything that even smells like marketing so it's hard for me to tell anymore.
- dmurray 6y ago
  The target market for a Librem phone is people who are hardcore about privacy and/or computing freedoms, who are probably motivated at least partially by fear.
  - fragsworth 6y ago
    It's a marketing piece, but I don't see anything terribly wrong with what they wrote. I also don't think you have to be that hardcore about it to want your phone to work like this.
  - dbcurtis 6y ago
    Congratulations! Your post made me do something that almost never happens -- I went and read an article that I otherwise had no intention of reading :) So here is a data point, it is only one, but it is mine: I am eagerly awaiting the arrival of my pre-ordered Librem 5. My motivation is almost entirely computing freedom, and a desire to support that concept in phones. I don't expect this phone to be polished enough to become my daily-driver. I don't expect that the cost/performance is going to look attractive. But I strongly believe in computing freedom, and I am willing to buy an overpriced phone in order to support and encourage the concept. Putting up money in a way that matters, and helping to demonstrate that a market exists, instead of merely talking about it. Fear is not a motivator for me. A desire for privacy is somewhat. I would estimate my freedom/privacy/fear breakdown as 85/15/0%. So to GP's post, is the article fear-mongering/FUD? IMHO, nah, just marketing blather designed to resonate with the kind of person that will give them money. Is whole-house alarm system marketing material fear-mongering? Also a matter of opinion and circumstance. As I said, for me it is about computing freedom. I don't think I am a hard-core Stallmanite. But I have been around long enough that I did CS homeworks on punch cards, and my friends and I all had to solder together our first personal computers because everything available came in kit form back then. I used to think RMS was pretty far out there. But from my perspective looking back over the years, I have to admit "RMS was right" more often than I like too.
caymanjim 6y ago
I don't need much from a phone, and just about any Android-capable phone would work for me, as far as OS and hardware capabilities go. The thing that's going to keep me tied to a Google-controlled phone for the indefinite future is Google Fi. I'm not aware of any other cell service plan that does what Fi does: $20/mo base, $10/gig after that (with everything from 6G-15G at no additional cost, after which you either get unlimited throttled data, or can start paying $10/gig for again). And the most important part of that (for me) is that it's the same price no matter where you are in the world. I haven't been traveling this year, but normally I would, and there's no other way I know of to use my phone internationally for so little (at least not without constantly swapping SIMs and changing the phone number).
- dannyw 6y ago
  That’s crazy. Here in Australia I pay A$35 a month for 45GB. Tax included.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- ignoramous 6y ago
  > ...constantly swapping SIMs and changing the phone number There are a lot of cloud telephony companies that'd vend you a number and gladly connect your calls over the Internet so that you avoid roaming fees [0]. And data-plans are easy and super cheap to come-by given the advent of esims [1]. [0] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.esim.numero https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.esim.numer... [1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobillium.airalo https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobillium....
- vecinu 6y ago
  I'm also on Fi and love it for the reasons you mentioned BUT keep in mind that swapping your SIM for a local plan is a lot cheaper, on average. In Eastern Europe for USD$10/month you get unlimited data and you can have people call you. The one thing I don't like is I can't have people call my number because it's a US number and it costs them extra to call it in Europe.
jtth 6y ago
My phone is not a home. It’s a filament in a fabric of affordances. I rely on others to support those affordances. I pay for some of them with money. I don’t want a castle. I want a society.
- javajosh 6y ago
  Your phone contains records of all the actions you take with those affordances. What you are looking at, who you are talking to, messages you've sent, inside and outside apps, plus a time series of sensor data that position you and can give audio/video of you at all times...it is foolish not to treat access to this device with great care.
- megous 6y ago
  Your phone is a little portable wannabe Orwell's telescreen, with more sensors than even Orwell could have imagined.
__d 6y ago
Without commenting on the overall thesis, it's inaccurate to say that if Apple removes Fortnite from the AppStore that it is also removed from users phones. Anyone who has already purchased Fortnite via the AppStore can still use it on their phone, in whatever version they had downloaded prior to the removal.
- pas 6y ago
  If it disables login with apple id, can those users use the app?
einpoklum 6y ago
I'm a bit skeptical about their presumption to be both an app store and a phone provider, but ok, I guess. > $749 USD pre-order Unfortunately, it seems the "security-focused" phone is only for very rich people. I mean, ok, if you can afford a new iPhone you can also afford this, but most people in the world can't spend half this much on a phone.
- qchris 6y ago
  This is somewhat fair, but I think it's also worth pointing out that it's not a business model w/o precedence. Not too long ago, you could have argued that same thing about the Tesla Model S; "electric cars are only for rich people". The capital from selling at a mark-up to wealthy early adopters helps to fund cheap(er) versions (i.e. Model 3) that are accessible to more people later on. Not a perfect analogy, and Purism's execution isn't exactly comparable to Tesla's, but I think the idea is the same.
- devilduck 6y ago
  Most people also do not buy their phone in one lump sum. They add payments to their phone bill, so if their carrier doesn't offer this phone, it becomes unaffordable.
- judge2020 6y ago
  > if you can afford a new iPhone you can also afford this And that's not taking into account the SE which has a modern processor and is $400.
- ajconway 6y ago
  And, unfortunately, they are expecting to deliver it 6 months from now.
- RealStickman_ 6y ago
  I think it's worth mentioning that the PinePhone exists as well an can be had for 150$ whenever they launch a new batch (every 2 months or so). It is also a Linux phone, maybe not as privacy focuses as the Librem 5, but it serves a similar niche in my opinion.
sam_lynx 6y ago
Always wanted for someone to make a copy of Apple’s products but without their insane level of control over your device. Looks like someone is finally going to do it :)
visarga 6y ago
Not castle, rental car. You're just a guest on your device, at least in real life.
bulka 6y ago
Sigh. Double checking my email: still the same. Order placed: January 16, 2019. Shipping ETA: mid-to-late November 2020. Off topic, I know, but ghrghghr....
gcb0 6y ago
paraphrasing the linked article: A little history lesson (from someone who actually bought their products). I have one personal and 5 company managed librem 13 linux laptops. It's been a nightmare of amateur hour problems. On two, the -/_ key only register 33% of the time it is pressed. None of the 4 or 5 m2 SSD I tested booted consistently from the open bios. Every boot required 3 to 7 reboots until they where seen. Needless to say, they are have simple 2.5mm SSDs and no developer want them now because of the lack of RAID. To the bean counters and HR they went. They still do not have usb3 support for epci, display, or charging. basically stuck in 2016. The Radio/Video switches are nothing but cutting the power to the USB bundled peripherals. there's no special driver or anything else. Though still better than the majority, but far from the best with truly integrated solutions. And support have been non-existent. And their forum used to be a bunch of people asking basic questions about their rebranded gnome, but lately it is a flood of "amateur android specialists" (adb script kiddies. thinking of so many puns now) threads on the librem5 phone... if you know the kind of content you get on xda forums, it's the same level.
henry_bone 6y ago
“The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the crown. It may be frail – its roof may shake – the wind may blow through it – the storm may enter – the rain may enter – but the King of England cannot enter.” Except in a "State of emergency" in Victoria, Australia, in this present day.
- gruez 6y ago
  ...or "security forces", if they have a warrant.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Not necessarily, depending on the country a warrant is not something that security forces care much about.
- RileyJames 6y ago
  Isn’t the state of emergency about powers to require someone to stay in their house / ‘castle’? What rules has the state declared over what one can do in their castle? The rules appear to be specifically about when, why and what you can do when “leaving” your castle. Which has always been the case.
ISL 6y ago
It can't just be your phone -- we should each have an inviolable online cache.
dasb 6y ago
My phone is a plunger: a tool that I don't like using, but need to use anyway.
kelnos 6y ago
I would really love to have a third possibility in the mobile space, especially one as privacy- and user-focused as Purism, but I'm not convinced I'll have the same breadth of experience that I have on Android. Reading through their FAQ[0] and their app list[1], it just seems like they haven't worked hard enough to achieve "app parity" with Android or iOS. I get that in some ways that's a non-goal, but when I consider my usage patterns, I just don't see myself being able to replace my Android phone with something like this. There's no replacement for my banking apps, things like Uber/Lyft or Postmates, streaming video/music services, etc. The web experiences for most of these are either nonexistent or just generally terrible. I think in some ways we've gone too far with the current dominant platforms for a third party to emerge for common usage, or even usage by fairly technical people who rely on mainstream apps. A third player would need to have deep pockets and a ton of industry and financial connections to get a viable alternative to Google/Apple Pay working, for example (and the FAQ says the first phone model won't even have NFC). Do you think Chase, Capital One, Wells Fargo, Vanguard, Robinhood, Schwab, ETrade, etc. are all going to write new apps for a new platform, or make their mobile web experiences good enough to act as a substitute? I really doubt it. There's a FAQ entry about making it possible to run Android apps on PureOS, but it didn't feel like that's much of a priority for them. And it's unclear whether many of these sorts of apps would even run: for example, I expect apps like Google Pay and some banking apps have some hard-to-emulate checks in place that ensure they're running on a conformant, non-rooted Android device. Even if there are workarounds for these sorts of things, it doesn't seem like it'd be safe to rely on those workarounds to not stop working at an inconvenient time. If they truly believe they can build a sustainable business with a super-low-volume product that only caters to an incredibly niche audience, then that's great, and I genuinely wish them the best of luck. But I fear that any third-party, open platform that ignores mainstream use-cases will just become more and more marginalized over time to the point that they won't even be a viable option for their intended audience. Or, at least, their users will have to have a second device that they use to interact with everything their Librem phone can't talk to. [0] https://puri.sm/faq/ https://puri.sm/faq/ (scroll down to the "Librem Phone" section) [1] https://tracker.pureos.net/w/pureos/mobile_optimized_apps/ https://tracker.pureos.net/w/pureos/mobile_optimized_apps/ -- which shows that the stock email app is unusable, and the calendar is usable but the UI doesn't fit on the screen properly.
rptr4 6y ago
I want to like their phone, but this will be a lot like using Linux on the desktop in the 90s. Software won’t be available and it will get in the way of anything productive I need to do.
- white-flame 6y ago
  Conversely, I'm sitting at a computer for the majority of my waking hours. My productivity happens there. For a phone, having calls/texts, web access (and most "apps" of any importance have a web version), calculator, clock/alarm, camera, and weather info is fine. I don't need tons of applications installed on it anyway; I have my real computer for that. I don't lose any convenience to go to a more security-minded phone. And besides, it's nice to be actually away from the computer when you're away from it, instead of having the phone being a constantly nagging ball and chain of your entire digital life. It's got to be socially & mentally healthier, too.
- Mediterraneo10 6y ago
  > Software won’t be available and it will get in the way of anything productive I need to do. This is Hacker News, where many of us are weirdos who prefer to do almost everything in Emacs. In that case, the software for these phones is definitely already available. What is still missing is the hardware keyboard like the Nokia N900 had.
- paulcarroty 6y ago
  Absolutely, but this is first phone from Purism; hardware are too far from latest iPhone too. Breaking mobile duopoly matters.
aaron695 6y ago
I've been running two accounts on my Android phone for a while. And I'm on the second account. It really doesn't work perfect, I can't hotpot for instance, I have to swap to the initial account. But I don't see the phone as my castle, more the second instance. Same diff perhaps. I do know when I handed it to someone to view something I though I really need a button to mute all the notifications while it's in their hands.
fouc 6y ago
I think this is a great point. Our personal computing devices should have the same sort of protections and affordances that our homes have. We should have an expectation of privacy and control over our domain. We should have the rights to build, repair, and more. If we're not leasing a phone or leasing a house, if we are owners of the phone or the house, then we should have full control to every aspect of it.
- grawprog 6y ago
  >If we're not leasing a phone But that, unfortunately seems to be the thinking behind most companies these days...that consumers don't own their phones, among other things, in fact most manufacturers seem to want to get onto thr bandwagon, they lease right to use them. I'm fully in agreement with you though. Phones and most end consumer devices should not be treated as leased devices. I may need to pay for a service to fully use said device, mobile data, wifi, etc. But those services should not be locked into one provider and should be seperate from the manufacturers. Limits on repairs and modification should be few and a void warranty should be the steepest penalty. Modifying or repairing a device should not be grounds to have that device bricked at the whims of a manufacturer.
  - dwighttk 6y ago
    What manufacturer leases a phone to an individual? I know some carriers do this.
    - NotSammyHagar 6y ago
      I think part of the idea of "not owning your device" is that apple and Google have controlled gardens, apple way more than android, but still. They control the system software.
      - varispeed 6y ago
        Apple also controls the hardware - for example they prevent vendors from selling some spare parts to 3rd parties. For example if a USB charging chip dies, you cannot replace it yourself, because you can't buy the part.
dhosek 6y ago
Ah geeze, I thought this was going to be something interesting and it turned out to be a stinking AD. I'm not going to have much faith in your arguments if your final point is going to be "buy our stuff instead of theirs."
- fsflover 6y ago
  What's wrong with stating a problem and suggesting a solution? Solutions are never free.
  - dhosek 6y ago
    Lots of solutions are free. And the fact of the matter is that this was not presented as an ad initially. It was disingenuously presented.
reeealloc 6y ago
Y'all are really complaining about an ad in an post that makes reasonable claims. At a grand scale they're right, your phone is not your castle.
jay_kyburz 6y ago
OT: but there is something wrong with the "t" in that font. Does everybody see the same thing as me? It wasn't till I read trustworthy that I thought wtf. https://imgur.com/a/UrwSjA5 https://imgur.com/a/UrwSjA5
- aembleton 6y ago
  Looks fine to me: https://imgur.com/hKhPIPP https://imgur.com/hKhPIPP I'm running Firefox 80.0.1 on Manjaro Linux. The font is loaded from https://puri.sm/wp-content/themes/wp-purism/fonts/librebaskerville/librebaskerville-regular-webfont-regular.woff2 https://puri.sm/wp-content/themes/wp-purism/fonts/librebaske... Check you're not blocking that URL.
  - jay_kyburz 6y ago
    weird, thanks for helping.
superkuh 6y ago
An alternative to making your phone is castle is not building your castles in the air. Don't use your phone as your primary computing device. You'll never be allowed to own your phone because it's a radio transmitter and it has a license, not you. You cannot own or control it.
- MacsHeadroom 6y ago
  The librem phone comes with a hot swappable mobile radio (or no radio). That hardware and firmware is actually separate from the phone entirely. PureOS also comes with VoIP call and texting apps which can be used on WiFi.
nojvek 6y ago
A part of me feels the next Apple ad is going to be “Your phone is your castle”. I do like their pro privacy stance against the big dogs. I just really hope the phone was more akin to the bicycle of the mind that Steve Jobs promised us.
- tpetry 6y ago
  They already did (about 1 week ago): https://youtube.com/watch?v=-l61NE0eqkw https://youtube.com/watch?v=-l61NE0eqkw
- Valkhyr 6y ago
  > I do like their pro privacy stance against the big dogs I do like their pro-privacy stance as well, but I take issue with that sentence in that it makes it sound like Apple is not a "big dog" and taking a stance for you, the little guy. Yes, their policies with regards to your data are easier to stomach than, say, Google's, but they are not on your side against the world, they are on their own side, and have plenty of questionable policies and decisions to show for that. Foremost of all being that they refuse you the ability to install a different OS on the hardware you own, or even install any application you would like on it. This is not merely an abstract philosophical matter either (though I'd argue it would matter even then): in China, you used to be able to install VPN apps to evade state surveillance, until China made Apple boot them from the App Store. I cannot see any argument that makes this into a win for customers.
quietthrow 6y ago
I think librem/purism has a point when you look at it isolated. But when looked at it holistically it completely missess the point. You can put in all the kill switches you want and sure thst will benefit in some small way but until the users data is with Apple/Google/Fb etc it dosnt matter Largely Which phone you use As you are still very exposed. Until that problem is solved (users truly owning their data) everything is simple a bandaid fix. Sure purism/librem might be a slightly better bandaid than what is offered by current vendors But it remains a bandaid never the less. The reality today still is that you can’t have greatly useful tools and it’s super powerful functionality separated from where and how it’s data is stored. Until that is separation comes all these security and privacy issues can’t be solved at its root. Once you look at it holistically you see it’s not just a hardware issue that you are dealing with. You are dealing with a much larger and complex set of issues: user caring about privacy; development of standards and tool that allow vendor agnostic data portability that still are as powerful as google sheets or say maps or keynote etc; pervasiveness of such tools as if only a small population of users are using those tools they are not very useful; business model that supports sustainable monetization of such tools so business can continue to provide such tools. It’s quite complex and kill switches and secure hardware can’t solve for thst. At least not alone.
- knocte 6y ago
  The perfect is the enemy of the done.
- NotUsingLinux 6y ago
  Web3 tries to do that. https://web3.foundation/about/ https://web3.foundation/about/
  - Tpt 6y ago
    There is also Solid from Tim Berners-Lee https://solidproject.org/ https://solidproject.org/
- tempodox 6y ago
  What's “thst”? Edit: Seems to be just a typo. I thought it was some obscure acronym and couldn't find a definition that made sense.
cromulent 6y ago
A house is physical property. A phone holds intellectual property and digital information, perhaps belonging to other people. It's complex. The comparison is overly simplified, I think. For example, as soon as you subscribe to corporate email, your device is considered "managed" and can be remote wiped. I was surprised not to see this in the article.
- henryackerman 6y ago
  That's what work profiles are for. I'm fine with my company nuking the work profile on my phone. It fulfills infosec requirements while still respecting my ownership over my own device.
  - cromulent 6y ago
    It's not your choice though, on whether they wipe the work profile or the whole device - it's theirs. It's not your castle.
- nybble41 6y ago
  > A phone holds intellectual property and digital information, perhaps belonging to other people. And a house can't? Not to belabor the obvious, but houses often contain phones, along with other storage media holding a wide range of digital information. The phone, like the house, is still your physical property, regardless of any information it may contain.
  - cromulent 6y ago
    I really think there is a big difference between digital devices and houses, and saying that the old "house is your castle" laws should apply to a phone is silly, especially when talking about app stores. Saying that "the phone is still your property" is true physically, but that's not what the OP is saying. He's saying that whoever sold you the phone shouldn't be able to control or limit what happens to it. Why not though? I wonder what he thinks about homeowner associations in the US. Or gun laws. Or zoning restrictions. Or all of the other laws that society has added since then. My Samsung TV won't let me install apps from anywhere but the Samsung app store. Is that really breaking the Magna Carta? This is silly.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
jerome-jh 6y ago
If you have a dummy account dedicated to your phone, use e.g. K-9 to check email on real accounts, manually export/import your address book, never share it, never sync it, you are pretty close to that.
- Ngate 6y ago
  good to know thanks
cloverr20 6y ago
I feel this is a great initiative, in the mobile OS android and ios goes unchallenged, similar to how it was when windows/mac were ruling earlier, and then linux came and became popular. I really hope many people get to know of this and can use/contribute to it. One big challenge might be to how to have something as an APP store, without a lot of malware/ poor quality apps.
notemaker 6y ago
In Sweden, all users are locked to whatever OS:s our mobile ID verification app BankID [1] supports. Yes you can opt to use a physical 2fa device to log onto your bank, but you're missing out on 99% of the digital banking infrastructure. So, even if I'd like to order one, I won't. The friction is too great. [1]: https://www.bankid.com/en/ https://www.bankid.com/en/
- llarsson 6y ago
  For context, this is not just about banking services. This is our trusted e-identity card. It is used for tons of systems where we need to prove that we are who we day we are. Everything from declaring our taxes to signing documents electronically to, yes, various banking apps. Also, I feel the same as you, notemaker. I would if I could, but without BankID, I could just add well get a dumbphone.
  - AckRite 6y ago
    In Lithuania we have secure(?) SIM cards that can be used instead of app for such purposes, the app being SmartID. Although I wonder whether secure SIMs work with dumbphones, have not researched how it actually works (probably a type of SMS?). Upon request, you have to provide sPIN1 to initiate an action and sPIN2 to finish it (login to bank, approve a transfer).
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      Dumb phones probably are able to use a SIM card app for that purpose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIM_Application_Toolkit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIM_Application_Toolkit
  - bestham 6y ago
    Fellow Swedes, change is coming in the form of the new national e-identity ID-card[1]. With this you would only need a smart card reader and a compliant browser in order to use eID and electronic signatures. As opposed to BankID this can be used to create derivative e-identities. [1]: https://www.regeringen.se/pressmeddelanden/2019/03/utredning-foreslar-nytt-statligt-id-kort-och-e-legitimation/ https://www.regeringen.se/pressmeddelanden/2019/03/utredning...
siwatanejo 6y ago
This is the content that really gives me hope. I think Purism is doing great work. But somehow I can't stop thinking that they are too small, and that these companies striving for user privacy and user choice should unite to make the fight against the Duopoly (Apple&Google) easier. I hope one day we can see a curated AppStore, ruled by an alliance formed by companies like Purism (e.g. Huawei -> HarmonyOS, Samsung -> TizenOS), but which doesn't impose what to install (people can opt-out without jail-breaking, like described in the article).
feralimal 6y ago
Yes, the phone is your castle, and the castle is breached. By design. Whether that's by your phone automatically backing up your data to the cloud, or whether that's because your OS decides to roll out a 'track and trace' update to be used by governmental agencies, or any number of other possibilities. Privacy cannot be regained by petitioning Google, Apple or the government for the features you think you should have - ie total control, repairability, headphone sockets, etc. You are the product. When it turns out our own phones are snitches, the answer is to get out. Why stay in a breached castle? And these snitches can't get stitches. The only answer I see it to ditch the phone.
- senko 6y ago
  > The only answer I see it to ditch the phone. Did you?
  - feralimal 6y ago
    No! It's so damn convenient. I wish I'd never got one. I'm not walking the walk. I've seriously considered the idea for a long time, and it seems bound to happen. The issue for me is the convenience of having a podcast player + camera. But, sigh, I'm not there yet. I'll tell you what, I'll try to extract myself again over the next week.
    - senko 6y ago
      Yeah. I think sometimes about just getting a dumbphone. But the convenience... I'm doing the next best thing - regularly checking up on permissions (& notifications) used by apps I have installed (on Android) and turning off anything that I don't need.
      - feralimal 6y ago
        Yes, but when the Play store can install whatever it wants without your knowledge....
- raxxorrax 6y ago
bobaosjdbakjdf 6y ago
asd
std_badalloc 6y ago
First I've heard of this. What is the software situation like on a device like this? I assume no comptability with Android, so apps have to be developed specifically targeting their OS?
- fsflover 6y ago
  This is GNU/Linux based on Debian, so apps should be developed in the same ways as for desktop Debian. Android apps could work in a VM, see anbox.
fsflover 6y ago
If you have a question about the GNU/Linux phone advertised in the article, look at this: https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Frequently-Asked-Questions https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Freque...
noisy_boy 6y ago
Speaking as an Android user, the usefulness of the eco-system is undeniable and leaving that is too much friction for most, even for those who do care about privacy. I think in addition to the focus on hardware, one approach should be to provide the tools to the users for more control. Provide a rooted phone by default. Add tools that let me see what my phone is doing behind the scenes. Give me option to turn-off some of the things I don't like (e.g. an app is sending analytics to some domain, let me turn that part off without turning off the whole app in a relatively simple way). Help with planned obsolence by providing updates etc and so on. Basically give back some control of jail/castle to the users without asking them to leave it completely. Edit: one more thing, please add NFC. Going back to carrying boatload of cards again is not an option.
- fsflover 6y ago
  > Provide a rooted phone by default. Librem 5 is rooted. It's basically just a Desktop computer in the form-factor of a phone. > Add tools that let me see what my phone is doing behind the scenes. Everything is open source. You have all the power to study what your phone is doing. Standard GNU/Linux tools should work. > Give me option to turn-off some of the things I don't like Everything is free software, you can change it as you like. Also, there is no analytics by default: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHcHi0TBFv4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHcHi0TBFv4 > Help with planned obsolence by providing updates Lifetime updates are promised. Even if the company dies, the community can support the phone, since it's FLOSS: https://wp.puri.sm/posts/librem-5-longevity-solving-the-problem-of-disposable-technology/ https://wp.puri.sm/posts/librem-5-longevity-solving-the-prob... > Edit: one more thing, please add NFC. Going back to carrying boatload of cards again is not an option Unfortunately, not in the first version. One step at a time.
  - tpxl 6y ago
    >> Add tools that let me see what my phone is doing behind the scenes. >Everything is open source. You have all the power to study what your phone is doing. Standard GNU/Linux tools should work. Yes, for the base system, however for third-party stuff, it would still be nice to prevent the apps from phoning home and stuff.
setereklakshit 6y ago
Is there a way this will better?
podgaj 6y ago
I know it is nice and convenient having a smartphone, but you all are creating the demand for these horrible phones. And since you keep buying them why should anything change? You complain and complain and google and apple laugh with your trillions of dollars. If you do not like what apple and google are doing, boycott them. I know it is hard, you are all addicted to the quick information and the dopamine rush. I know because that was me. And many of you here are probably developers sucking off the teat that you complain about. Myself? I use a flip phone while I wait for a phone that somewhat meets my criteria for something close to my linux based laptop.
- StavrosK 6y ago
  > you are all addicted to the quick information and the dopamine rush No, I'm addicted to being able to coordinate with my friends, and the additional friction of not being on WhatsApp means I won't be invited to stuff as often. This sanctimonious diatribe isn't going to make a flip phone any more useful in a country where nobody calls or uses SMS.
  - podgaj 6y ago
    The trouble is you think this cannot happen without a smartphone. If you want things to change you have to take a stand and SACRIFICE. If your friends will not reach out to you because you are not on an App, are they really your friends?
    - StavrosK 6y ago
      > If your friends will not reach out to you because you are not on an App, are they really your friends? No, certainly not. That's why I make all my friends send me their invitations through the mail, to test their loyalty. I'm sure I'll get the first one any day now.
nuker 6y ago
> illustrates how Apple markets their castle’s defenses as protecting the castle residents when in reality it’s about controlling all that goes on inside the castle. .. which ensures best in the market protection of the castle residents, for which they happily pay premium. > The biggest threat to most people ends up not being from uninvited hackers, it’s from the apps Apple and Google do invite in that capture and sell your data. Thats completely wrong. Apple does not make money on users data. They sell protected, private devices and services. Google is direct opposite.
Razengan 6y ago
I collected a list of arguments in favor of maintaining the status quo on iOS and I’ve yet to see anyone offer a good solution to these: ---- The problems with letting all apps advertise external payment systems: • Someone may publish a free app to avoid paying anything to Apple, and then charge users [an asston of] money to ""unlock"" via an alternate payment system. • Users may not be able to see a list of all in-app purchases (and their guaranteed prices) as they can on the App Store, without downloading the app. • Sharing your payment details and other information with multiple entities, and having to continually trust each of them (e.g. to not abuse or leak). • Confused users may clog up Apple's customer support with complaints related to third-party payment systems. • Angry users may demand Apple to offer refunds for shit that was paid for via third-party payment systems. ---- The problems with allowing third-party app stores on iOS: • How will iOS sandboxing be enforced for apps delivered via third-party stores? Will those apps still have to be submitted to and signed by Apple? • Third-party stores would need the privilege to write binaries on your iPhone. How will that privilege be regulated to prevent abuse? e.g. what happens if a store starts writing malware? • Users may sometimes have to wait longer for an app to update on one store than on others (as already happens on Steam vs GoG). • Developers would no longer be assured that they will have access to literally all the users that iOS has, by publishing on just one store. This is the biggest kicker for me as an indie dev. You would have to submit to each store, wait for approval on each of them, update for each of them... to come close to the userbase that you can currently access by just publishing once on the App Store. • Developers will no longer all play by the same rules. One store may allow some content while another may prohibit it. • Controversial content like porn may still ultimately be bound by Apple's ruling on such matters, rendering moot the freedom of third-party stores in what kind of apps they may offer. • iOS Parental Control and Screen Time restrictions may be ineffective on other stores (and browsers too if third-party rendering engines were allowed). • If an app or game is exclusive to a store that a user isn't already using, they would have to create a new account and maintain an additional app just to access that one exclusive. • Not all stores may be compatible with the iOS backup and restore system, or the APIs for app-thinning and on-demand resources.
whatsmyusername 6y ago
I’m fine with the Apple moat. The average user is too stupid to defend a castle.
sadfev 6y ago
I really like the philosophy of Free Software and particularly applaud the efforts of Purism. But the phone is unusable!! 4 hours of battery life, persistent bugs and hefty price tag. Maybe privacy has a huge premium to pay, which I doubt 99% are willing to pay
dathinab 6y ago
Man I wish: - I could use a librephone without major drawbacks - puri.sm in the future Teaming up with Fairphone, so that you don't have to choose between a free software or fair hardware
thisisjustmine 6y ago
Did anyone else notice the sneaky font change on the 30% cut to make it look like 80% at a glance?
LdSGSgvupDV 6y ago
US: Not your phone, is our phone.

499 points by 0DHm2CxO7Lb3 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

neom 6y ago

I noticed it's powered by an "ethical operating system", however they don't really go into any detail about what an ethical operating system is.

valvar 6y ago
An operating system containing only libre software, I assume. At least in my book, software must respect the freedoms of its users in order to be ethical. And their OS is indeed libre and respects its users.
- threeseed 6y ago
  Sounds pretty hypocritical if you're not running it on libre hardware as well. I assume Purism makes their own CPUs, memory etc ?
  - kelnos 6y ago
    No, but they are running on hardware they've carefully selected that does not require any non-free software or binary blobs to operate, and they include hardware kill switches for all the sensors and radios so if you still don't completely trust this "third party" hardware, you can at least shut it off and only turn it on when you really need to use it. At some point you do, unfortunately, have to compromise, because expecting a small, privacy-focused upstart to do their own silicon design and run their own fabs is just not reasonable.
    - FeepingCreature 6y ago
      Also the modem doesn't have DMA access to the phone's memory.
  - bo1024 6y ago
    libre hardware isn't really a term, unless you are referring to firmware maybe. What do you mean by it? (added) For example, Stallman: > In the meantime, there is no need to reject hardware with nonfree designs on principle. Last line of this essay: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.en.html https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-hardware-designs.en.html
teddyh 6y ago
They use their own PureOS: https://pureos.net/ https://pureos.net/
fsflover 6y ago
PureOS is a free OS endorsed by the Free Software Foundation: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html.

james412 6y ago

They've taken so long to deliver Librem 5 that even normies have started reverting back to candybar phones in the meantime

aftergibson 6y ago
Shows the strength of the pinephone. Release something cheap, quick and hackable rather than try to deliver everything. It’s been a really impressive project so far!
- d33 6y ago
  Thanks for reminding me about it. I can see it's already sold out: https://store.pine64.org/ https://store.pine64.org/ Curious if there's going to be another batch.
  - blihp 6y ago
    They're doing CE batches which run about a month each but the underlying hardware is the same for all of them. Just follow their blog (https://www.pine64.org/blog/ https://www.pine64.org/blog/) and wait for the announcement for the next batch preorder.
    - qchris 6y ago
      Not quite the same; they're now selling two slightly different versions. One has 2GB of RAM, while the other has 3GB RAM and is usually marketed under a "Convergence" label. For example, the UBports CE and the pmOS hardware has some slight revision that changes your ability to connect with the phone over Ethernet. I believe that the upcoming Manjaro CE will have the same distinction between models. [1] https://store.pine64.org/product/pinephone-community-edition-postmarketos-with-convergence-package-limited-edition-linux-smartphone/ https://store.pine64.org/product/pinephone-community-edition...
      - blihp 6y ago
        Right, but that's a different model. The 2GB CE's are otherwise identical to each other aside from bug fixes.

phoe-krk 6y ago

Missing "your" in the beginning of the title.

saagarjha 6y ago
I suspect that Hacker News editorialized that title automatically.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- OJFord 6y ago
  In case anyone reading's unaware, when that happens (if it seems silly/obviously not an improvement) you can edit and resubmit exactly the same title as originally submitted, and it will then be accepted as-is.
dang 6y ago
Fixed. Thanks!

saagarjha 6y ago

> Because iOS software, backed by iPhone hardware, actively prevents a customer from installing any software on an iPhone outside of the App Store, it does also prevent attackers from installing malicious software. Because the App Store has rules about how applications (outside of their own) can access customer data, if Apple discovers a competitor like Google or Facebook is violating its privacy rules it can remotely remove their software from iPhones, even internal corporate versions of software owned by Google or Facebook employees. This is a bit inaccurate; first because the App Store has a spotty record of stopping malware from reaching your phone and also because the apps pulled there did not go through the App Store, they were actually sideloaded using enterprise deployment. Apple does have the ability to remotely disable applications downloaded from the App Store, but to my knowledge it has never used this ability. > These companies have built very sophisticated and secure defenses all in the name of protecting you from the world outside their walls, yet in reality the walls are designed to keep you inside much more than they are designed to keep attackers out. The security community often gets so excited about the sophistication of these defenses backed by secure enclaves and strong cryptography that their singular focus on what those defenses mean for attackers blinds them from thinking about what they mean for everyone else. I mean, all you have to do is look at the things that are implemented to see that Apple's goal in many cases is to protect their software, not you. There is custom silicon in every recent iPhone that does nothing but stop modification of kernel code, even in the face of code execution and arbitrary read/write in EL1: interesting from an academic standpoint, but if you stop and think about it for more than a second it's entirely useless for actually protecting users.

syshum 6y ago
Apple's goal is to protect their share price.. Nothing else. Everything Apple does is in service of that goal. This is why they are hardline on AppStore policies, and why they are hardline against Independent repair. Any PR they have about protecting the user is just marketing
- logical_proof 6y ago
  I’ve been seeing this idea on the Internet a lot more for months now and I’ve been trying to put my finger on what I think is wrong with it I think I finally figured it out. I work for a corporation, it’s not a massive corporation, when I first started it was a midsize family owned company and we never did work in service to the bottom line at least not solely. First and foremost we were interested in customers and providing value to them. I think that any major corporation or business small large whatever also has that same responsibility and probably also the same drive. Any organization is made up of multiple people and there’s definitely going to be some actors that are completely bottom line driven but you’re going to also have individuals whose purpose is meeting customer needs and providing customer value. I’m not saying Apple is an altruistic corporation or doesn’t have concern for the bottom line, but making such a broad generalization to say that Apple only serves their bottom line perhaps sets you and others up with a pessimistic attitude where the people doing good work are missed. This is mostly a bit of introspection on the thought that I’ve been trying to flesh out for the last few months and it’s not meant as a criticism of your comment in anyway I understand the sentiment of where you’re coming from because I’ve also been in that same place. I think my views are just changing a little bit and I thought I’d take this opportunity to write them down hope you have a great day.

underdeserver 6y ago

Obligatory CGP Grey video: https://youtu.be/e-ZpsxnmmbE https://youtu.be/e-ZpsxnmmbE

hevelvarik 6y ago

It will be great to have more players in the smart phone OS domain so I hope this makes it big. On the other hand, the downside of taking the security and privacy of your phone into your own hands, is that ... you’ve taken the security and privacy of the phone into your own hands. I’m happy to pay Apple to do it for me because my phone is nowhere near my main or most important computing device and I also quite like that they poke google and Facebook in the eye from time to time. Sure, Apple is just a profit driven enterprise like the rest but their business model is directly related to keeping users happy at least for some value of users and happy. The only downside for me is that I can’t write an app for my device because I haven’t bought into the Apple computer ecosystem.

29083011397778 6y ago
> I’m happy to pay Apple to do it for me because my phone is nowhere near my main or most important computing device But for millions, their mobile device is their main or most important device, whether it runs iOS, iPadOS, or Android. It can be their main device, with one example being Apple's divisive "What's a computer" ad. Another example is those that rely on mobile, due either to cost or lack of physical space for a desktop or laptop. For others, their mobile is the most important, likely because that's where all their messages, contacts, location history, and more, resides.
- nodamage 6y ago
  > For others, their mobile is the most important, likely because that's where all their messages, contacts, location history, and more, resides. Indeed. And some of those people value the security and privacy of that data and want to reduce the risk of having it stolen by malware and rogue apps, so they intentionally buy into an ecosystem that enforces strict controls on what apps can run on their devices.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
Polylactic_acid 6y ago

ohgreatwtf 6y ago

>your phone is your castle, you decide what is on it >systemd

einpoklum 6y ago
Where I read this, I laughed; then it occurred to me that maybe systemd actually gets installed on some phones; then I cried a little.
- megous 6y ago
  There's quite a bit of variety in OSes I checked. Anything from systemd, to upstart, to random bash init scripts (some oses are based on devuan).

nodamage 6y ago

> Your security and privacy aren’t really protected inside these walls because the main point of these security measures is to enforce control, security against attackers and protecting your privacy is mostly marketing spin. The author presents this as fact but does nothing to actually justify the claim. I'm not sure why we should assume it is true when two decades of history of malware on Windows (and to a lesser extent, Android) clearly demonstrate the problems with having no walls at all. The irony of course being that this article itself is a marketing piece for this company's product.

rbecker 6y ago
> The author presents this as fact but does nothing to actually justify the claim. Let me fill in the justification then: https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/03/01/google-explicitly-bans-ad-blockers-from-the-play-store-except-all-those-ad-blocking-web-browsers-apparently/ https://www.androidpolice.com/2016/03/01/google-explicitly-b... https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/03/apple-bans-app-used-by-hong-kong-protestors/ https://www.macrumors.com/2019/10/03/apple-bans-app-used-by-... https://time.com/5497200/samsung-facebook-app-delete/ https://time.com/5497200/samsung-facebook-app-delete/ Edit as reply: They justify the claim that phone vendors enforce control unrelated to security. And the various linuxes and FOSS Android ROMs can serve as examples of reasonably secure systems without walled gardens. (Or more accurately, walled gardens, but where the user has the key to the garden gates, and can install alternative repositories/app stores). With all that, it takes a downright reckless degree of trust in corporations that have already betrayed that trust many times, to believe their motives in locking down ever more computing platforms are to benefit the user, and that this continual retreat of user freedoms won't end badly.
- nodamage 6y ago
  I'm not exactly sure how you think these examples justify the author's claim, can you elaborate? Cause it seems like what you're doing is the equivalent of pointing to an example of someone killing another person and then saying "gotcha! see how the existence of police and murder laws don't completely prevent murder?" The underlying question is does the walled garden approach improve the security and privacy of the overall ecosystem compared to the non-walled alternative, not whether it leads to 100% perfect security and privacy (which is an unobtainable ideal).

keenmaster 6y ago

I just want a phone with full Windows 10 that is as customizable as desktop computers are. Phones are very powerful nowadays. There's no reason for them to have the same limitations as 10 or even 5 years ago.

dannyw 6y ago
There is a good reason: battery life.
- keenmaster 6y ago
  It's my device. I should have the choice to override the standard use case to unlock the phone's full functionality at the expense of battery life. I almost always have a charging cable with me, and a 20,000 mAh powerbank. Furthermore, there is a lot of room to increase charging speeds, but most phone manufacturers have dragged their feet because extremely fast charging speeds aren't necessary for the standard use case. However, that "standard use case" is outdated and needs to be reevaluated.
  - gambiting 6y ago
    >> Furthermore, there is a lot of room to increase charging speeds, but most phone manufacturers have dragged their feet because extremely fast charging speeds aren't necessary for the standard use case. And you know, the very small matter of rapid charging destroying phone batteries quickly. There are phones out there which will charge at 30 or every 40(!!!) watts of power, but it tends to kill the battery rather quickly. Vast majority of people charge their phones at night, and then the phone gets a good 6-10 hours of uninterrupted charging. If anything, phones charge too quickly by default, at the expense of battery life. >>It's my device. I should have the choice to override the standard use case to unlock the phone's full functionality at the expense of battery life. You're free to do with your device as you please, but I don't see why anyone else should be obliged to cater to your wants and needs.
    - keenmaster 6y ago

marcinzm 6y ago

Is it just me or does this feel to be written in a FUD marketing style? Very strong focus on fear in the writing and what seems like cherry picked examples. Then again I have learned to have a defensive and negative reaction to anything that even smells like marketing so it's hard for me to tell anymore.

dmurray 6y ago
The target market for a Librem phone is people who are hardcore about privacy and/or computing freedoms, who are probably motivated at least partially by fear.
- fragsworth 6y ago
  It's a marketing piece, but I don't see anything terribly wrong with what they wrote. I also don't think you have to be that hardcore about it to want your phone to work like this.
- dbcurtis 6y ago
  Congratulations! Your post made me do something that almost never happens -- I went and read an article that I otherwise had no intention of reading :) So here is a data point, it is only one, but it is mine: I am eagerly awaiting the arrival of my pre-ordered Librem 5. My motivation is almost entirely computing freedom, and a desire to support that concept in phones. I don't expect this phone to be polished enough to become my daily-driver. I don't expect that the cost/performance is going to look attractive. But I strongly believe in computing freedom, and I am willing to buy an overpriced phone in order to support and encourage the concept. Putting up money in a way that matters, and helping to demonstrate that a market exists, instead of merely talking about it. Fear is not a motivator for me. A desire for privacy is somewhat. I would estimate my freedom/privacy/fear breakdown as 85/15/0%. So to GP's post, is the article fear-mongering/FUD? IMHO, nah, just marketing blather designed to resonate with the kind of person that will give them money. Is whole-house alarm system marketing material fear-mongering? Also a matter of opinion and circumstance. As I said, for me it is about computing freedom. I don't think I am a hard-core Stallmanite. But I have been around long enough that I did CS homeworks on punch cards, and my friends and I all had to solder together our first personal computers because everything available came in kit form back then. I used to think RMS was pretty far out there. But from my perspective looking back over the years, I have to admit "RMS was right" more often than I like too.

caymanjim 6y ago

I don't need much from a phone, and just about any Android-capable phone would work for me, as far as OS and hardware capabilities go. The thing that's going to keep me tied to a Google-controlled phone for the indefinite future is Google Fi. I'm not aware of any other cell service plan that does what Fi does: $20/mo base, $10/gig after that (with everything from 6G-15G at no additional cost, after which you either get unlimited throttled data, or can start paying $10/gig for again). And the most important part of that (for me) is that it's the same price no matter where you are in the world. I haven't been traveling this year, but normally I would, and there's no other way I know of to use my phone internationally for so little (at least not without constantly swapping SIMs and changing the phone number).

dannyw 6y ago
That’s crazy. Here in Australia I pay A$35 a month for 45GB. Tax included.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
ignoramous 6y ago
> ...constantly swapping SIMs and changing the phone number There are a lot of cloud telephony companies that'd vend you a number and gladly connect your calls over the Internet so that you avoid roaming fees [0]. And data-plans are easy and super cheap to come-by given the advent of esims [1]. [0] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.esim.numero https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.esim.numer... [1] https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobillium.airalo https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.mobillium....
vecinu 6y ago
I'm also on Fi and love it for the reasons you mentioned BUT keep in mind that swapping your SIM for a local plan is a lot cheaper, on average. In Eastern Europe for USD$10/month you get unlimited data and you can have people call you. The one thing I don't like is I can't have people call my number because it's a US number and it costs them extra to call it in Europe.

jtth 6y ago

My phone is not a home. It’s a filament in a fabric of affordances. I rely on others to support those affordances. I pay for some of them with money. I don’t want a castle. I want a society.

javajosh 6y ago
Your phone contains records of all the actions you take with those affordances. What you are looking at, who you are talking to, messages you've sent, inside and outside apps, plus a time series of sensor data that position you and can give audio/video of you at all times...it is foolish not to treat access to this device with great care.
megous 6y ago
Your phone is a little portable wannabe Orwell's telescreen, with more sensors than even Orwell could have imagined.

__d 6y ago

Without commenting on the overall thesis, it's inaccurate to say that if Apple removes Fortnite from the AppStore that it is also removed from users phones. Anyone who has already purchased Fortnite via the AppStore can still use it on their phone, in whatever version they had downloaded prior to the removal.

pas 6y ago
If it disables login with apple id, can those users use the app?

einpoklum 6y ago

I'm a bit skeptical about their presumption to be both an app store and a phone provider, but ok, I guess. > $749 USD pre-order Unfortunately, it seems the "security-focused" phone is only for very rich people. I mean, ok, if you can afford a new iPhone you can also afford this, but most people in the world can't spend half this much on a phone.

qchris 6y ago
This is somewhat fair, but I think it's also worth pointing out that it's not a business model w/o precedence. Not too long ago, you could have argued that same thing about the Tesla Model S; "electric cars are only for rich people". The capital from selling at a mark-up to wealthy early adopters helps to fund cheap(er) versions (i.e. Model 3) that are accessible to more people later on. Not a perfect analogy, and Purism's execution isn't exactly comparable to Tesla's, but I think the idea is the same.
devilduck 6y ago
Most people also do not buy their phone in one lump sum. They add payments to their phone bill, so if their carrier doesn't offer this phone, it becomes unaffordable.
judge2020 6y ago
> if you can afford a new iPhone you can also afford this And that's not taking into account the SE which has a modern processor and is $400.
ajconway 6y ago
And, unfortunately, they are expecting to deliver it 6 months from now.
RealStickman_ 6y ago
I think it's worth mentioning that the PinePhone exists as well an can be had for 150$ whenever they launch a new batch (every 2 months or so). It is also a Linux phone, maybe not as privacy focuses as the Librem 5, but it serves a similar niche in my opinion.

sam_lynx 6y ago

Always wanted for someone to make a copy of Apple’s products but without their insane level of control over your device. Looks like someone is finally going to do it :)

visarga 6y ago

Not castle, rental car. You're just a guest on your device, at least in real life.

bulka 6y ago

Sigh. Double checking my email: still the same. Order placed: January 16, 2019. Shipping ETA: mid-to-late November 2020. Off topic, I know, but ghrghghr....

gcb0 6y ago

paraphrasing the linked article: A little history lesson (from someone who actually bought their products). I have one personal and 5 company managed librem 13 linux laptops. It's been a nightmare of amateur hour problems. On two, the -/_ key only register 33% of the time it is pressed. None of the 4 or 5 m2 SSD I tested booted consistently from the open bios. Every boot required 3 to 7 reboots until they where seen. Needless to say, they are have simple 2.5mm SSDs and no developer want them now because of the lack of RAID. To the bean counters and HR they went. They still do not have usb3 support for epci, display, or charging. basically stuck in 2016. The Radio/Video switches are nothing but cutting the power to the USB bundled peripherals. there's no special driver or anything else. Though still better than the majority, but far from the best with truly integrated solutions. And support have been non-existent. And their forum used to be a bunch of people asking basic questions about their rebranded gnome, but lately it is a flood of "amateur android specialists" (adb script kiddies. thinking of so many puns now) threads on the librem5 phone... if you know the kind of content you get on xda forums, it's the same level.

henry_bone 6y ago

“The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the crown. It may be frail – its roof may shake – the wind may blow through it – the storm may enter – the rain may enter – but the King of England cannot enter.” Except in a "State of emergency" in Victoria, Australia, in this present day.

gruez 6y ago
...or "security forces", if they have a warrant.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Not necessarily, depending on the country a warrant is not something that security forces care much about.
RileyJames 6y ago
Isn’t the state of emergency about powers to require someone to stay in their house / ‘castle’? What rules has the state declared over what one can do in their castle? The rules appear to be specifically about when, why and what you can do when “leaving” your castle. Which has always been the case.

ISL 6y ago

It can't just be your phone -- we should each have an inviolable online cache.

dasb 6y ago

My phone is a plunger: a tool that I don't like using, but need to use anyway.

kelnos 6y ago

I would really love to have a third possibility in the mobile space, especially one as privacy- and user-focused as Purism, but I'm not convinced I'll have the same breadth of experience that I have on Android. Reading through their FAQ[0] and their app list[1], it just seems like they haven't worked hard enough to achieve "app parity" with Android or iOS. I get that in some ways that's a non-goal, but when I consider my usage patterns, I just don't see myself being able to replace my Android phone with something like this. There's no replacement for my banking apps, things like Uber/Lyft or Postmates, streaming video/music services, etc. The web experiences for most of these are either nonexistent or just generally terrible. I think in some ways we've gone too far with the current dominant platforms for a third party to emerge for common usage, or even usage by fairly technical people who rely on mainstream apps. A third player would need to have deep pockets and a ton of industry and financial connections to get a viable alternative to Google/Apple Pay working, for example (and the FAQ says the first phone model won't even have NFC). Do you think Chase, Capital One, Wells Fargo, Vanguard, Robinhood, Schwab, ETrade, etc. are all going to write new apps for a new platform, or make their mobile web experiences good enough to act as a substitute? I really doubt it. There's a FAQ entry about making it possible to run Android apps on PureOS, but it didn't feel like that's much of a priority for them. And it's unclear whether many of these sorts of apps would even run: for example, I expect apps like Google Pay and some banking apps have some hard-to-emulate checks in place that ensure they're running on a conformant, non-rooted Android device. Even if there are workarounds for these sorts of things, it doesn't seem like it'd be safe to rely on those workarounds to not stop working at an inconvenient time. If they truly believe they can build a sustainable business with a super-low-volume product that only caters to an incredibly niche audience, then that's great, and I genuinely wish them the best of luck. But I fear that any third-party, open platform that ignores mainstream use-cases will just become more and more marginalized over time to the point that they won't even be a viable option for their intended audience. Or, at least, their users will have to have a second device that they use to interact with everything their Librem phone can't talk to. [0] https://puri.sm/faq/ https://puri.sm/faq/ (scroll down to the "Librem Phone" section) [1] https://tracker.pureos.net/w/pureos/mobile_optimized_apps/ https://tracker.pureos.net/w/pureos/mobile_optimized_apps/ -- which shows that the stock email app is unusable, and the calendar is usable but the UI doesn't fit on the screen properly.

rptr4 6y ago

I want to like their phone, but this will be a lot like using Linux on the desktop in the 90s. Software won’t be available and it will get in the way of anything productive I need to do.

white-flame 6y ago
Conversely, I'm sitting at a computer for the majority of my waking hours. My productivity happens there. For a phone, having calls/texts, web access (and most "apps" of any importance have a web version), calculator, clock/alarm, camera, and weather info is fine. I don't need tons of applications installed on it anyway; I have my real computer for that. I don't lose any convenience to go to a more security-minded phone. And besides, it's nice to be actually away from the computer when you're away from it, instead of having the phone being a constantly nagging ball and chain of your entire digital life. It's got to be socially & mentally healthier, too.
Mediterraneo10 6y ago
> Software won’t be available and it will get in the way of anything productive I need to do. This is Hacker News, where many of us are weirdos who prefer to do almost everything in Emacs. In that case, the software for these phones is definitely already available. What is still missing is the hardware keyboard like the Nokia N900 had.
paulcarroty 6y ago
Absolutely, but this is first phone from Purism; hardware are too far from latest iPhone too. Breaking mobile duopoly matters.

aaron695 6y ago

I've been running two accounts on my Android phone for a while. And I'm on the second account. It really doesn't work perfect, I can't hotpot for instance, I have to swap to the initial account. But I don't see the phone as my castle, more the second instance. Same diff perhaps. I do know when I handed it to someone to view something I though I really need a button to mute all the notifications while it's in their hands.

fouc 6y ago

I think this is a great point. Our personal computing devices should have the same sort of protections and affordances that our homes have. We should have an expectation of privacy and control over our domain. We should have the rights to build, repair, and more. If we're not leasing a phone or leasing a house, if we are owners of the phone or the house, then we should have full control to every aspect of it.

grawprog 6y ago
>If we're not leasing a phone But that, unfortunately seems to be the thinking behind most companies these days...that consumers don't own their phones, among other things, in fact most manufacturers seem to want to get onto thr bandwagon, they lease right to use them. I'm fully in agreement with you though. Phones and most end consumer devices should not be treated as leased devices. I may need to pay for a service to fully use said device, mobile data, wifi, etc. But those services should not be locked into one provider and should be seperate from the manufacturers. Limits on repairs and modification should be few and a void warranty should be the steepest penalty. Modifying or repairing a device should not be grounds to have that device bricked at the whims of a manufacturer.
- dwighttk 6y ago
  What manufacturer leases a phone to an individual? I know some carriers do this.
  - NotSammyHagar 6y ago
    I think part of the idea of "not owning your device" is that apple and Google have controlled gardens, apple way more than android, but still. They control the system software.
    - varispeed 6y ago
      Apple also controls the hardware - for example they prevent vendors from selling some spare parts to 3rd parties. For example if a USB charging chip dies, you cannot replace it yourself, because you can't buy the part.

dhosek 6y ago

Ah geeze, I thought this was going to be something interesting and it turned out to be a stinking AD. I'm not going to have much faith in your arguments if your final point is going to be "buy our stuff instead of theirs."

fsflover 6y ago
What's wrong with stating a problem and suggesting a solution? Solutions are never free.
- dhosek 6y ago
  Lots of solutions are free. And the fact of the matter is that this was not presented as an ad initially. It was disingenuously presented.

reeealloc 6y ago

Y'all are really complaining about an ad in an post that makes reasonable claims. At a grand scale they're right, your phone is not your castle.

jay_kyburz 6y ago

OT: but there is something wrong with the "t" in that font. Does everybody see the same thing as me? It wasn't till I read trustworthy that I thought wtf. https://imgur.com/a/UrwSjA5 https://imgur.com/a/UrwSjA5

aembleton 6y ago
Looks fine to me: https://imgur.com/hKhPIPP https://imgur.com/hKhPIPP I'm running Firefox 80.0.1 on Manjaro Linux. The font is loaded from https://puri.sm/wp-content/themes/wp-purism/fonts/librebaskerville/librebaskerville-regular-webfont-regular.woff2 https://puri.sm/wp-content/themes/wp-purism/fonts/librebaske... Check you're not blocking that URL.
- jay_kyburz 6y ago
  weird, thanks for helping.

superkuh 6y ago

An alternative to making your phone is castle is not building your castles in the air. Don't use your phone as your primary computing device. You'll never be allowed to own your phone because it's a radio transmitter and it has a license, not you. You cannot own or control it.

MacsHeadroom 6y ago
The librem phone comes with a hot swappable mobile radio (or no radio). That hardware and firmware is actually separate from the phone entirely. PureOS also comes with VoIP call and texting apps which can be used on WiFi.

nojvek 6y ago

A part of me feels the next Apple ad is going to be “Your phone is your castle”. I do like their pro privacy stance against the big dogs. I just really hope the phone was more akin to the bicycle of the mind that Steve Jobs promised us.

tpetry 6y ago
They already did (about 1 week ago): https://youtube.com/watch?v=-l61NE0eqkw https://youtube.com/watch?v=-l61NE0eqkw
Valkhyr 6y ago
> I do like their pro privacy stance against the big dogs I do like their pro-privacy stance as well, but I take issue with that sentence in that it makes it sound like Apple is not a "big dog" and taking a stance for you, the little guy. Yes, their policies with regards to your data are easier to stomach than, say, Google's, but they are not on your side against the world, they are on their own side, and have plenty of questionable policies and decisions to show for that. Foremost of all being that they refuse you the ability to install a different OS on the hardware you own, or even install any application you would like on it. This is not merely an abstract philosophical matter either (though I'd argue it would matter even then): in China, you used to be able to install VPN apps to evade state surveillance, until China made Apple boot them from the App Store. I cannot see any argument that makes this into a win for customers.

quietthrow 6y ago

I think librem/purism has a point when you look at it isolated. But when looked at it holistically it completely missess the point. You can put in all the kill switches you want and sure thst will benefit in some small way but until the users data is with Apple/Google/Fb etc it dosnt matter Largely Which phone you use As you are still very exposed. Until that problem is solved (users truly owning their data) everything is simple a bandaid fix. Sure purism/librem might be a slightly better bandaid than what is offered by current vendors But it remains a bandaid never the less. The reality today still is that you can’t have greatly useful tools and it’s super powerful functionality separated from where and how it’s data is stored. Until that is separation comes all these security and privacy issues can’t be solved at its root. Once you look at it holistically you see it’s not just a hardware issue that you are dealing with. You are dealing with a much larger and complex set of issues: user caring about privacy; development of standards and tool that allow vendor agnostic data portability that still are as powerful as google sheets or say maps or keynote etc; pervasiveness of such tools as if only a small population of users are using those tools they are not very useful; business model that supports sustainable monetization of such tools so business can continue to provide such tools. It’s quite complex and kill switches and secure hardware can’t solve for thst. At least not alone.

knocte 6y ago
The perfect is the enemy of the done.
NotUsingLinux 6y ago
Web3 tries to do that. https://web3.foundation/about/ https://web3.foundation/about/
- Tpt 6y ago
  There is also Solid from Tim Berners-Lee https://solidproject.org/ https://solidproject.org/
tempodox 6y ago
What's “thst”? Edit: Seems to be just a typo. I thought it was some obscure acronym and couldn't find a definition that made sense.

cromulent 6y ago

A house is physical property. A phone holds intellectual property and digital information, perhaps belonging to other people. It's complex. The comparison is overly simplified, I think. For example, as soon as you subscribe to corporate email, your device is considered "managed" and can be remote wiped. I was surprised not to see this in the article.

henryackerman 6y ago
That's what work profiles are for. I'm fine with my company nuking the work profile on my phone. It fulfills infosec requirements while still respecting my ownership over my own device.
- cromulent 6y ago
  It's not your choice though, on whether they wipe the work profile or the whole device - it's theirs. It's not your castle.
nybble41 6y ago
> A phone holds intellectual property and digital information, perhaps belonging to other people. And a house can't? Not to belabor the obvious, but houses often contain phones, along with other storage media holding a wide range of digital information. The phone, like the house, is still your physical property, regardless of any information it may contain.
- cromulent 6y ago
  I really think there is a big difference between digital devices and houses, and saying that the old "house is your castle" laws should apply to a phone is silly, especially when talking about app stores. Saying that "the phone is still your property" is true physically, but that's not what the OP is saying. He's saying that whoever sold you the phone shouldn't be able to control or limit what happens to it. Why not though? I wonder what he thinks about homeowner associations in the US. Or gun laws. Or zoning restrictions. Or all of the other laws that society has added since then. My Samsung TV won't let me install apps from anywhere but the Samsung app store. Is that really breaking the Magna Carta? This is silly.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

jerome-jh 6y ago

If you have a dummy account dedicated to your phone, use e.g. K-9 to check email on real accounts, manually export/import your address book, never share it, never sync it, you are pretty close to that.

Ngate 6y ago
good to know thanks

cloverr20 6y ago

I feel this is a great initiative, in the mobile OS android and ios goes unchallenged, similar to how it was when windows/mac were ruling earlier, and then linux came and became popular. I really hope many people get to know of this and can use/contribute to it. One big challenge might be to how to have something as an APP store, without a lot of malware/ poor quality apps.

notemaker 6y ago

In Sweden, all users are locked to whatever OS:s our mobile ID verification app BankID [1] supports. Yes you can opt to use a physical 2fa device to log onto your bank, but you're missing out on 99% of the digital banking infrastructure. So, even if I'd like to order one, I won't. The friction is too great. [1]: https://www.bankid.com/en/ https://www.bankid.com/en/

llarsson 6y ago
For context, this is not just about banking services. This is our trusted e-identity card. It is used for tons of systems where we need to prove that we are who we day we are. Everything from declaring our taxes to signing documents electronically to, yes, various banking apps. Also, I feel the same as you, notemaker. I would if I could, but without BankID, I could just add well get a dumbphone.
- AckRite 6y ago
  In Lithuania we have secure(?) SIM cards that can be used instead of app for such purposes, the app being SmartID. Although I wonder whether secure SIMs work with dumbphones, have not researched how it actually works (probably a type of SMS?). Upon request, you have to provide sPIN1 to initiate an action and sPIN2 to finish it (login to bank, approve a transfer).
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Dumb phones probably are able to use a SIM card app for that purpose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIM_Application_Toolkit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIM_Application_Toolkit
- bestham 6y ago
  Fellow Swedes, change is coming in the form of the new national e-identity ID-card[1]. With this you would only need a smart card reader and a compliant browser in order to use eID and electronic signatures. As opposed to BankID this can be used to create derivative e-identities. [1]: https://www.regeringen.se/pressmeddelanden/2019/03/utredning-foreslar-nytt-statligt-id-kort-och-e-legitimation/ https://www.regeringen.se/pressmeddelanden/2019/03/utredning...

siwatanejo 6y ago

This is the content that really gives me hope. I think Purism is doing great work. But somehow I can't stop thinking that they are too small, and that these companies striving for user privacy and user choice should unite to make the fight against the Duopoly (Apple&Google) easier. I hope one day we can see a curated AppStore, ruled by an alliance formed by companies like Purism (e.g. Huawei -> HarmonyOS, Samsung -> TizenOS), but which doesn't impose what to install (people can opt-out without jail-breaking, like described in the article).

feralimal 6y ago

Yes, the phone is your castle, and the castle is breached. By design. Whether that's by your phone automatically backing up your data to the cloud, or whether that's because your OS decides to roll out a 'track and trace' update to be used by governmental agencies, or any number of other possibilities. Privacy cannot be regained by petitioning Google, Apple or the government for the features you think you should have - ie total control, repairability, headphone sockets, etc. You are the product. When it turns out our own phones are snitches, the answer is to get out. Why stay in a breached castle? And these snitches can't get stitches. The only answer I see it to ditch the phone.

senko 6y ago
> The only answer I see it to ditch the phone. Did you?
- feralimal 6y ago
  No! It's so damn convenient. I wish I'd never got one. I'm not walking the walk. I've seriously considered the idea for a long time, and it seems bound to happen. The issue for me is the convenience of having a podcast player + camera. But, sigh, I'm not there yet. I'll tell you what, I'll try to extract myself again over the next week.
  - senko 6y ago
    Yeah. I think sometimes about just getting a dumbphone. But the convenience... I'm doing the next best thing - regularly checking up on permissions (& notifications) used by apps I have installed (on Android) and turning off anything that I don't need.
    - feralimal 6y ago
      Yes, but when the Play store can install whatever it wants without your knowledge....
raxxorrax 6y ago

bobaosjdbakjdf 6y ago

asd

std_badalloc 6y ago

First I've heard of this. What is the software situation like on a device like this? I assume no comptability with Android, so apps have to be developed specifically targeting their OS?

fsflover 6y ago
This is GNU/Linux based on Debian, so apps should be developed in the same ways as for desktop Debian. Android apps could work in a VM, see anbox.

fsflover 6y ago

If you have a question about the GNU/Linux phone advertised in the article, look at this: https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Frequently-Asked-Questions https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Freque...

noisy_boy 6y ago

Speaking as an Android user, the usefulness of the eco-system is undeniable and leaving that is too much friction for most, even for those who do care about privacy. I think in addition to the focus on hardware, one approach should be to provide the tools to the users for more control. Provide a rooted phone by default. Add tools that let me see what my phone is doing behind the scenes. Give me option to turn-off some of the things I don't like (e.g. an app is sending analytics to some domain, let me turn that part off without turning off the whole app in a relatively simple way). Help with planned obsolence by providing updates etc and so on. Basically give back some control of jail/castle to the users without asking them to leave it completely. Edit: one more thing, please add NFC. Going back to carrying boatload of cards again is not an option.

fsflover 6y ago
> Provide a rooted phone by default. Librem 5 is rooted. It's basically just a Desktop computer in the form-factor of a phone. > Add tools that let me see what my phone is doing behind the scenes. Everything is open source. You have all the power to study what your phone is doing. Standard GNU/Linux tools should work. > Give me option to turn-off some of the things I don't like Everything is free software, you can change it as you like. Also, there is no analytics by default: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHcHi0TBFv4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yHcHi0TBFv4 > Help with planned obsolence by providing updates Lifetime updates are promised. Even if the company dies, the community can support the phone, since it's FLOSS: https://wp.puri.sm/posts/librem-5-longevity-solving-the-problem-of-disposable-technology/ https://wp.puri.sm/posts/librem-5-longevity-solving-the-prob... > Edit: one more thing, please add NFC. Going back to carrying boatload of cards again is not an option Unfortunately, not in the first version. One step at a time.
- tpxl 6y ago
  >> Add tools that let me see what my phone is doing behind the scenes. >Everything is open source. You have all the power to study what your phone is doing. Standard GNU/Linux tools should work. Yes, for the base system, however for third-party stuff, it would still be nice to prevent the apps from phoning home and stuff.

setereklakshit 6y ago

Is there a way this will better?

podgaj 6y ago

I know it is nice and convenient having a smartphone, but you all are creating the demand for these horrible phones. And since you keep buying them why should anything change? You complain and complain and google and apple laugh with your trillions of dollars. If you do not like what apple and google are doing, boycott them. I know it is hard, you are all addicted to the quick information and the dopamine rush. I know because that was me. And many of you here are probably developers sucking off the teat that you complain about. Myself? I use a flip phone while I wait for a phone that somewhat meets my criteria for something close to my linux based laptop.

StavrosK 6y ago
> you are all addicted to the quick information and the dopamine rush No, I'm addicted to being able to coordinate with my friends, and the additional friction of not being on WhatsApp means I won't be invited to stuff as often. This sanctimonious diatribe isn't going to make a flip phone any more useful in a country where nobody calls or uses SMS.
- podgaj 6y ago
  The trouble is you think this cannot happen without a smartphone. If you want things to change you have to take a stand and SACRIFICE. If your friends will not reach out to you because you are not on an App, are they really your friends?
  - StavrosK 6y ago
    > If your friends will not reach out to you because you are not on an App, are they really your friends? No, certainly not. That's why I make all my friends send me their invitations through the mail, to test their loyalty. I'm sure I'll get the first one any day now.

nuker 6y ago

> illustrates how Apple markets their castle’s defenses as protecting the castle residents when in reality it’s about controlling all that goes on inside the castle. .. which ensures best in the market protection of the castle residents, for which they happily pay premium. > The biggest threat to most people ends up not being from uninvited hackers, it’s from the apps Apple and Google do invite in that capture and sell your data. Thats completely wrong. Apple does not make money on users data. They sell protected, private devices and services. Google is direct opposite.

Razengan 6y ago

I collected a list of arguments in favor of maintaining the status quo on iOS and I’ve yet to see anyone offer a good solution to these: ---- The problems with letting all apps advertise external payment systems: • Someone may publish a free app to avoid paying anything to Apple, and then charge users [an asston of] money to ""unlock"" via an alternate payment system. • Users may not be able to see a list of all in-app purchases (and their guaranteed prices) as they can on the App Store, without downloading the app. • Sharing your payment details and other information with multiple entities, and having to continually trust each of them (e.g. to not abuse or leak). • Confused users may clog up Apple's customer support with complaints related to third-party payment systems. • Angry users may demand Apple to offer refunds for shit that was paid for via third-party payment systems. ---- The problems with allowing third-party app stores on iOS: • How will iOS sandboxing be enforced for apps delivered via third-party stores? Will those apps still have to be submitted to and signed by Apple? • Third-party stores would need the privilege to write binaries on your iPhone. How will that privilege be regulated to prevent abuse? e.g. what happens if a store starts writing malware? • Users may sometimes have to wait longer for an app to update on one store than on others (as already happens on Steam vs GoG). • Developers would no longer be assured that they will have access to literally all the users that iOS has, by publishing on just one store. This is the biggest kicker for me as an indie dev. You would have to submit to each store, wait for approval on each of them, update for each of them... to come close to the userbase that you can currently access by just publishing once on the App Store. • Developers will no longer all play by the same rules. One store may allow some content while another may prohibit it. • Controversial content like porn may still ultimately be bound by Apple's ruling on such matters, rendering moot the freedom of third-party stores in what kind of apps they may offer. • iOS Parental Control and Screen Time restrictions may be ineffective on other stores (and browsers too if third-party rendering engines were allowed). • If an app or game is exclusive to a store that a user isn't already using, they would have to create a new account and maintain an additional app just to access that one exclusive. • Not all stores may be compatible with the iOS backup and restore system, or the APIs for app-thinning and on-demand resources.

whatsmyusername 6y ago

I’m fine with the Apple moat. The average user is too stupid to defend a castle.

sadfev 6y ago

I really like the philosophy of Free Software and particularly applaud the efforts of Purism. But the phone is unusable!! 4 hours of battery life, persistent bugs and hefty price tag. Maybe privacy has a huge premium to pay, which I doubt 99% are willing to pay

dathinab 6y ago

Man I wish: - I could use a librephone without major drawbacks - puri.sm in the future Teaming up with Fairphone, so that you don't have to choose between a free software or fair hardware

thisisjustmine 6y ago

Did anyone else notice the sneaky font change on the 30% cut to make it look like 80% at a glance?

LdSGSgvupDV 6y ago

US: Not your phone, is our phone.